document resume pub date 86 30p. - files.eric.ed.gov · document resume. ed 281 630 ps 016 487....

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 281 630 PS 016 487

AUTHOR Powers, David A.; Anderson, Patricia J.TITLE An Examination of After School Care Programs in North

Carolina Public Schools.PUB DATE 86NOTE 30p.PUB TYPE Reports - Research/Technical (143)

EDRS PRICE MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS *After School Programs; Elementary Secondary

Education; *Latchkey Children; Program Content;Public Schools; *School Age Day Care; *SchoolDistricts; *School Role; School Surveys; StateSurveys

IDENTIFIERS *North Carolina; *Program Characteristics

ABSTRACTBecause North Carolina has the nation's highest

percentage of mothers working outside of the home, each of thestate's 141 public school systems was surveyed with a 33-itemquestionnaire to identify existing after school care programs.Responses were received from 138 systems._A total of 48 programsserving 51 systems were identified, and information was gathered onseven aspects of program design and operation, including location,population served, operational policies, program content, personnel,evaluation, and plans for future changes. Survey results are reportedand characteristics common to many programs are listed. It isconcluded that after school care programming is rapidly gainingacceptance in North Carolina, and that public schools are wellequipped to offer such p:cograms. (RH)

***********************************************************************Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made

from the original document.***********************************************************************

ALE. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONMice of EducatIonal Researchand Improvement

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)

X'his document has _been -reproduced aseceisted_lrom the person or organizationoriginating it0 Minor-changes have been made to improvereproduction quality.

Pointsof view or opinionsstatedin thlaciccu.ment do_ not_ necessarily represent officialOtiRl position or policy.

After School Care

An Examination of After School Care

Programs in North Carolina Public Schools

David A. Powers, Ed.D.

Department of Spe ial Education

EaSt Carolina University

Patricia J. Anderson, Ed.D.

Department of Elementary Education

East Carolina UniverSity

"PERMISSION TOREMODUCETHISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

Dmvislitoatsikkivieu2 c. ftv.42,v9sr

0 THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)."

tal)

ri4

Running head: After School Care

After School Card 2

Abstract

Educators have become increasingly concerned about the large

number of children who must provide for their own care before-

and/or after school hours. The mounting evidence that at

least some of these "latchkey" children are harmed by such

circumstances has led many public school systems to develop

After School Care Programs (ASCP). Because North Carolina has

the nation's highest percentage of mothers working outside of

the home, efforts undertaken by this state are of particular

significance. Each of the 141 public school systems in North

Carolina was surveyed. Based on responses received from 138

of these systems, 48 ASCP were identified. Information is

provided on location, population, operational policies,

content, personnel, evaluation, and plans for future changes.

A review of the literature and a discussion of pertinent

issues are also provided.

After School Care 3

An Examination of After_School_Car_e

Programs in North CaraIin.a_Rublic_schools

The term "latchkey" has come into popular use to describe

school-aged children who &re responsible for their own care

before and/or after School hours. Professionals in child

development, day care, and public education have become

increasingly concerned about this population. Tlis growth in

concern appears directly related to two factors: (I)

_

increasing awareness of the large number of latchkey children,

and (2) mounting evidence that, fOr at least same latchkey

6hi1din in sime settings, the effeCt6 are potentially

negat47e.

Tnc-idence of latchkey children

Estimates of the number of latchkey Children Vary

depending on how latchkey status is defined. StrOMan and Duff

(1982), using 1976 Census Bureau data, reported that 2 million

(13%) children between the ages of 7 and 13 With working

mothers provide their own care before and/or after schbO1

hours. Based on figures from the Children's Defente Fund,

McCurdy (1985) indicated that 7 million children between ages

5 and 13 are unsupervised during nonschool hours. Elder

(1985) indicated that when the 6 to 16 age range is

considered, the latchkey population may be as high as 15

million. According to Educa_tion_Week ("State Chief UrgeS,"

1986), of the 3.6 million children who began school in

September 1986, "between one quarter and one third will be

4

After School Care 4

latchkey children with no one, to greet them when they come

home from school" (p. 14).

Effects on_latchkey children

There are indications that some children are affected in

negative ways and that, in some cases, these effects are

powerful. Long and Long (1982) reported that latchkey

arrangements disrupt social interaction between peers and

retard the growth of interpersonal skills. Garbarino (1980)

described four risks associated with latchkey status,

including the risk of children feeling badly, acting badly,

developing badly, and being treated badly. Stroman and Duff

(1982) reported that the lack of adult supervision "may

encourage experimentation with drugs, alcohol and sex" (p.

79). McCurdy (1985) suggested that adolescents are often

harmed by lack of after school opportunities and that this

"lack of productive activities may even be linked to teen

suicides" (p. 17) . Hall (1985) described some latchkey

children as "virtually prisoners in their own homes" (p. 117)

and noted problems of loneliness and isolation. Latchkey

children may be, more often than their supervised peers, the

vidtims of sibling abuse and sibling sexual abuse (Huff,

1982). Woods (1972) found that latchkey children have more

academic and social problems than those with adult

supervision. According to Campbell and Flake (1985), the

problems of latchkey children "include crime (especially

shoplifting), injury, rape, drug abuse, mental anguish, etc."

(p. 381). Long (1984) coined the term "latchkey syndrome" to

5

After School Care 5

summarize a set of charactel:istics associated with latchkey

status. These include "increased fear, a heightened sense of

social isolation, a lowered sense of self-worth, retentment

toward parents, and a drift toward occupations that, while

they might be creative, demand less social interaction" (p.

62).

The _public school-response

With the realization that self-care may have harmful

effects, many public school systems have developed programs to

meet the needs of latchkey children. While there is debate

about the propriety of public school sponsorship of such

programs, it is clear that they are increasing. As public

echools respond to latchkey children, After School Care

Programs (ASCP) have been among the earliest to develop.

Thete programs provide care for tchool=aged children after

regular school hours. Because the majority of ASCP have been

the product of independent initiatives by systems, little is

known about program characterietict. This study provides

information on the current statue of public school sponsored

ASCP in North Carolina.

Data on ASCP in North Carolina public schools are of

special interest and significance. Ae can be seen in Figure

1, a larger percentage of women with school-aged children wor:.

abdtt here

in North Carolina than in the United States. Figure I also

illustratee the increase in the percentage of working mothers

After School Care 6

with school.=aged children in North Carolina from 1970 to

1980. The 1980 North Carolina labor force was 55% women while

43% of the national labor force was comprised of women (Office

of Policy and Planning, North Carolina Department of

Administration, 1981). With the nation'S highest percentage

of mothers working outside the home, North Carolina's efforts

ito respond to latchkey children are of particular mportance.

North CarOlina public school_s_amd-ASCP

A 33-iteth survey was sent to the 141 ptbli-c Sdh661

systems in North Carolina in March 1986. Responses were

received from 138 (98%) systems. ASCP were available to

Children in 51 (37%) school systems. Several SyStems

participated in cooperatively arranged ASCP, reSulting in a

total of 48 distinct programs serving 51 school tyttems. The

numbers of years of operation for .aieSe programs ard provided

in Table 1.

IhSert Table I about here

SyStems not operating ASCP weie Sked if they planned to

do SO in the upcoming school year. Of the 83 systems

responding, 50 (60%) indicated that they did not; 30 (36%)

reported that such programs were being considered. In 3 (4%)

systems, plans were underway for impIementaticn.

Those systems not providing ASCP were asked to offer

reasons for the abEence of such programs. Table 2 liStS the

most frequently reported reasons. Other reasons mentioned leSS

Insert Table 2 about here

7

After School Care 7

frequently included insurance concerns, limited administrative

interest, transportation problems, overtaxed facilities, and

sparsely distributed populations. One respondent indicated

that such programs represented an inappropriate role for

public schools.

Location a d population

Of the 48 programs examined, 46 (96%) were housed in

elementary schools. ASCP were assigned a variety of locations

within schools. Those most frequently reported were

classrooms (79%), gymnasiums (52%), cafeteriaS (48%), and

libraries/media.centers (40%).

A total of 6,129 children were served in ASCP._

Enrollment by grade level was not available for ten programs.

ASCP enrollment data, as reported by 38 programs, ate

presented in Table 3. Data on enrollment trends indicated

Insert Table 3 about hero

that the majority of ASCP (71%) were experiencing increased

enrollment. Only 3 (6%) programs reported declining

enrollment, while 11 (23%) indicated stable enrollment.

Handicapped children were served in the regular ASCP in

57% of responding programs. In 4 prov.ams (9%), the:Je

children were served in special ASCP.

Each of the ASCP began services at the end of its school

day. ASCP closed at 6:00 p.m. in 67% of the programs and at

5:30 p.m. in 27%. Other closing times ranged from 5:00 to

8

After School Care 8

5:45 p.m. Part-time enrollment wat available in 73% of the

programs. ASCP operated on teacher workdays in 50% of the

programs.

Costs to parents varied significantly. One program

reported no charge, while others détcribed "sliding scale"

arrangements. Among systems having a tet fee, charges ranged

from $5.00 to $25.00 wer.kly. The mott frequently reported

charge wat $10.00 to $15.00 weekly (63%). Most ASCP (85%)

reported that their programs were financially self-supporting.

Respondeats described a variety of ttrategies for

publicizing ASCP. These techniques included articles in the

local newspaper (95%), a school system newsletter (75%),

brochures (65%), radio (48%), and television (17%).

Respondents also reported a variety of techniques for

distributing ASCP application materials. These included

sending formt home with students (77%), enclosing forms in a

brochure (42%), distributing forms at parent/teacher

organization meetings (38%), mailing forms (25%), printing

forms in the newspaper (21%), and distributing forms in a

school newsletter (23%).

Transportation represents a complex problem when limited

enrollment precludes offering ASCP at each elementary school.

ASCP designed to provide service to more than one school must

provide a means for transporting children to a central tite.

Of the systems surveyed, 3111 provided such transportation.

Because ASCP operate during hours when other Services at

the school are not available, provisions for dealing with

9

After School Care

emergencies represent an important consideration. Most ASCP

had written policies for dealing with emergencies (79%).

These included availability of a telephone (94%), availability

of student medical information (85%), and first aid training

of pe..csonnel (50%).

Program!ContentlActivit+es

While the majority of ASCP (88%) indicated that a pre-

planned schedule governed daily operations, most emphasized

that this was loosely structured. Such a schedule was viewed

as an appropriate way to deal with children who had already

spent a full school day in classroom environments.

Each respondent was asked to indicate activitieS which

occurred each day. Daily activities, and the percentage of

respondents reporting each, were: homework (94%), snacks

(88%), free play (85%), physical education (75%) , tutoria3

assistance (65%), quiet time (54%), and direct instruction

(48%). Noted with less frequency were art, games, craftS,

movies, compnter work, field trips, special projects, learning

centers, and music. Respondents were also asked to report the

amount of time devoted daily to each activity. Mor g. than one-

fifth of each day's schedule was devoted to free play in 54%

of the programs, physical education in 29%, and homework

completion in 26%.

Survey respondents were asked if teachers sent

assignments or requests for tutorial assistance to ASCP. In

37it of the ASCP, a formal precedure had been established for

this process.

10

After School Care 10

Respondents were asked to describe special events not

scheduled on a daily basis. Of the 46 programs responding,

85% indicated that such events were available. Field trips

were the most frequently reported (56%). Others included

computers (51%) , counseling (33%); gymnastics (33%); career

exploration (15%); and foreign lang.cage instruction (13%)

Those reported with less frequency included 4-H programs;

cooking, drama, calligraphy; swimming, band, dance;

photography, and publishing; Several programs reported that

Boy Scouts; Girl Scouts, and Daisys met during ASCP hours;

Equipment and supplies available in ASCP included games

(98%) , art supplies (96%) , craft supplies (94%); :physical

education equipment (92%), books and magazines (92%),

audiovisual materials (88%) , instructional materials (75%);

and computers (50%).

Personnel

Administrative organ±zation and personnel requirements

varied -oith the unique structure of each system; When

administrative responsibility was held by personnel in the

central office; it was usually the Community Schools Director

(48%). The second most frequently reported arrangement (31%)

placed the school principal in charge of the ASCP located

within his/her facility. Each respondent was asked whether

certification was required for ASCP teachers. Certification

was required in 23% of the programs surveyed; Almost half -Of

the programs surveyed (47%) utilized volunteers. When asked

about parent participation, 54% of ASCP reported at least

ii


occasional involvement.

In 29% of the systems, an advisory board for ASCP was

reported. Another 10% had an advisory board which served the

community schools program and, therefore, offered input into

ASCP operation.

The majority of systems (79%) had established guidelines

regarding adult/child ratios in ASCP. Those most frequently

reported were 1:15 (39%) and 1:10 (29%).

Program Evaluation

Each program was asked to describe procedures utilized to

evaluate ASCP. Evaluation techniques included surveys of

parents (33%), teachers (27%) , and students (15%) . No formal

evaluation occurred in 29% of the programs.

Each respondent was asked to rate attitudes of a variety

of groups toward ASCP. Table 4 provides a summary of these


ratings.

Each respondent was asked to rate six elements of the

ASCP and to provide an overall program rating. Table 5


provides a summary of these ratings.

ProgramPlanning

Each respondent was asked to characterize plans for Lhe

future design and operation of ASCP. Respondents described

plans to increase the numbers of students served (81%),

2


special events (64%), program locations (53%), and the range

of grades served (19%). Other changes mentioned less

frequently included the intent to operate on a cost effective

basis, to implement summer programs, to increase use of

community resources, and to survey other grades and schools to

determine need. One program planned to reduce the range of

grades served. No programs indicated plans to decrease the

number of students or the number of locations. Six programs

(11%) anticipated no changes.

Discussion

With more than one-third of the school systems in North

Carolina providing after school care and with a statewide

enrollment in excess of 6,000, it is clear that this state h s

begun to address the issues associated with latchkey

children. While after school care represents a relatively new

role for North Carolina's public schools, with 61% having

begun operation in the last three years, there are indications

ithat it s gaining momentum. The majority of ASCP reported

increasing enrollment (71%). Of those systems not operating

ASCP, 40% were considering such programs.

With the majority of ASCP located in elementary schools

and the majority of children served in grades kindergarten

through three, it is clear that after school care is currently

an elementary school responsibility. Such a finding holds

important implications, ranging from the preparation of

teachers and administrators to the provision of adequate

resources and support services.

1 3


More than one-half of the programs examined served

handicapped students. Handicapped children in latchkey

circumstances repreSent a special concern to both parents and

educators. While Such children may represent accommodation

problems, the availability of ASCP to this population is of

particular significance. The negative effects of self-care on

handicapped children may be even more pronounced than in the

case of non-handicapped youngsters.

Determination of charges for ASCP is an issue with which

many systems were having difficulty. The decisions which

systems make about program costs are directly related to the

issue of acceSSibility. As ASCP grow, this issue is likely to

become increaSingly significant. Lower income families must

be afforded the Same opportunities for ASCP as higher income

families. Fixed charges which effectively exclude

participation by lower income families may result in poorer

children remaining in latchkey circumstances, while children

of familid8 of greater means are served. Under such

circumstances, ASCP might well become a "middle class

experience." The use of income-based "sliding scale"

arrangements represents one approach to dealing with thit

issue.

As reported earlier, 45% of systems n t offering ASCP

cited prohibitive costs as a rear,on. With 85% of ASCP

financially self-supporting, concerns regarding prohibitive

costs represent a questionable rationale for the failure to

offer programs. The issue of cost may, however, become a more

114


important consideration in systems which move toward the use

of "sliding scales."

In order to impact upon the latchkey population, systems

must offer after school care when families need it. A key

consideration in establishing daily closing times should be

parent needs for travel time to ASCP. The variability in

closing times (5:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m.) suggests that each

program recognizes the unique characteristics of the community

which it serves. Part-time enrollment, an option available in

the majority of programs (73%), allows ASCP to address a wider

spectrum of needs. Half of the programs did not operate on

teacher work-days. Parents of children enrolled in these

programs are placed in the difficult position of finding child-

care on days distributed throught the school year.

As ASCP become established in schools, program quality

may receive increasing attention. While parents may initially

be Satisfied to have a secure setting for their children, they

are likely to quickly concern themselves with program content

and quality. Most programs described a loosely structured

schedule with much flexibility afforded personnel in managing

this schedule. While a variety of events were occurring in

ASCP, a small number represent the largest portion of daily

schedules. Children were spending most of their time involved

in free play, physical education, and homework. With 94% of

ASCP involving participants in the completion of homework

assignments and with 65% providing tutorial assistance on a

daily basis, a substantial amount of time was devoted to

1 5


academics. Given thiS commitment, it would appear that the

ASCP should receive information about participants'

assignments from claSsroom teacherS. This, however, did not

appear to be occurring. Only Slightly more than one-third of

the programs had 08tabliShed a procedure providing for input

from teachers. An opportunity for utilizing ASCP as a

mechanism for academic growth was, for the most part, not

being realized. It appearS, however, that ASCP were utilizing

community resourceS in creative ways. Experiences available

to children in ASCP were rich and varied and certainly served

to enrich and expand the lives of participants.

The equipment and Supplies reported seem appropriate,

given the typeb of activities which dominate ASCP schedules.

Of particular note is the finding that one-half of the

programs either had a microcomputer located in the ASCP

setting, or provided access to one located elsewhere in the

school.

A key to the Success of any program is the quality of

personnel. The Second most frequently cited reason for not

offering ASCP was concern regarding availability of qualified

personnel. While a small percentage of ASCP reported

certification as a condition for employment, many indicated

that personnel were certified in some area, and most (72%)

rated personnel as exceptional.

An area of variation across systems was policy regarding

adult/child ratios. While most have established guidelines,

the range was substantial (1:5 to 1:25). Variability in this

1 6-


area will and probably should continue to characterize ASCP.

Optimal adult/child ratios vary with specific program

characteristics such as the range of ages and grades served.

VolunteerS in ASCP were contributing in a number of ways.

They provided additional supervision, particularly important

in programS with high adult/child ratios and/or wide grade and

age tangeS. Volunteers provided a means for building

community involvement in and a se_ise of shared responsibility

for ASCP. The presence of volunteers provided youngsters with

increased opportunities for interaction with a variety of

people.

Those systems operr.ting ASCP felt very positive about

both the program and the perceptions held by others of the

program. Those perceived to hold the most positive attitudes

toward ASCP were superintendents, parents of students

enrolled, and the participants themselves. Program elements

most often viewed as exceptional were personnel,

administration, and facilities. Those aspects of the program

least often rated as exceptional were curriculum, equipment

a d supplies, and support services. Concerns about curriculum

may have reflected the uncertainty which respondents felt

regarding program content. With ASCP representing a new a d

different role for many systems, it is not clear what sort of

curriculum, if any, should characterize such programs.

Summary

Based upon survey responses from 138 of North Carolina'S

141 public school systems, it was determined that 48 distinct

1-7


ASCP serve a total of 51 systems. Data were gathered on seven

major aspects of ASCP design and operation. While a good deal

of variability characterized each area, the following common

attributes emerged.

1. Location. Mos_ ASCP were located in elementary

school classrooms.

2. Population. The majority of ASCP were experiencing

increased enrollment. Most students participating in ASCP

were in grades kindergarten through three.

3. Operational Policies. ASCP typically ended daily

operation at 6:00 p.m., charged parents $10.00 to $15.00

weekly, offered part-time enrollment, and were financially

self-supporting.

4. Program Content/Activities. Most ASCP had a

preplanned, but loosely structured, daily schedule with free

play, physical edu-ation, and homework completion as major

activities. A wide range of special events were made

available.

5. Personnel. Most school systems did not require

certification of ASCP personnel but perceived current

personnel to be performing in an exceptional manner.

6. Evaluation. Most ASCP did not have a formal

procedure for program evaluation. ASCP were, however,

reported to be perceived in a positive manner by both school

personnel and the community.

7. Planning. Most ASCP intended to increase the number

of students served. Many intended to increase program

18


locations.

Conclusions

While after school care rrcsgramming rep-resents a

relatively new role for schools, it appears that in

North Carolina this role is rapidly gaining acceptance. As is

to be expected with any developing prog/am, there are

questions which remain unanswered. Establishing charges which

allow for maximum program self-sufficiency and, yet, provide

opportunities for families of lower income to participate,

represents a dilemma for many systems. Questions remain

regarding program content. What sort of schedule is most

appropriate for youngsters who have already spent a full day

in classrooms? Should time be devoted to providing assistance

to children experiencing difficulty with classroom

assignments? If so, what relationship should exist between

classroom teachers and ASCP personnel? What characteristics

are most desirable in ASCP personnel and should these

positions be filled by certified teachers? These questions

and others must be resolved through research directed toward

defining optimal characteristics of after school care

programming.

Perhaps the most fundamental question involves the role

which the nation's public school systems should play in the

provision of after school care. There are those who argue

that the evidence of damage to children left to care for

themselves is not conclusive enough to warrant the provision

of new programs. It would seem, however, that in a society

19-


which prides itself on child-centeredness, programs must be

available until clear evidence exists that children are not

harmed by latchkey lives. Public schools are in the best

position to offer such programs. As McCurdy (1985) has

pointed out, they have the facilities, knowledge, and

experience. What remains to be seen is whether they have the

commitment.

In a recent article in The New York Times, Janet Elder

(1985) reported the results of a survey conducted by the

classroom magazine Spr=t. Elementary children were asked to

describe their greatest fear. The results were both

surprising and, for those truly concerned with the well-being

of children, upsetting. Over 80% of these children expressed

as their greater fear, the fear of being home alone! If we

decide not to listen to the researchers, perhaps we should

listen to the children.

20

.z..


References

Campbell, L. P., & Flake, A. E. (1985). Latchkey children

What is the answer? Clearing House, 58 (9), 381-383.

Elder, J. (1985, September 5). New programs aid latchkey

children. New York Times, pp. Cl, C6.

Garbarino, J. (1984). Can American families afford the luxury

o2 childhood? Boston, MA: National Conference on Latchkey

Children. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 248

973)

Hall, J. M. (1985). Latchkey children: Is anybody home? 0 r

responsibility. Illinois Teacher of Home Economics, 28

(3), 117=119.

Huff, K. (1982, September). The lonely life of latchkey

children. People Magazine, pp. 83=84.

Long, T. J. (1984). So who cares if I'm home? Educational

Horizons, 62 (2), 60-64.

Long, T. J., & Long, L. (1982). Latchkey children: The child's

view of self care. Urbana, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on

Elementary and Early Childhood Education. (ERIC Document

Reproduction Service No. ED 211 229)

McCurdy, J. (1985). Schools respond to latchkey children.

School-Administrator, 42 (3), 16=18.

Office of Policy and Planning, North Carolina Department of

Administration. (1981). Our children. Our future. Raleigh,

NC: Author.

State chief urges schools to address child=care dilemma.

(1986, April 30). Education week, p. 2.

21


Stroman, S. H., & Duff, R. E. (1982). The latchkey child:

Whose responsibility? Childhood Education, 59 (2), 76-79.

Woods, M. B. ;1972). The unsupervised child of the working

mother. Developmental Psychology, 6, 14-25.

Table 1

NumbSrS of Years of Operation of ASCP

After Sdh001 Care 22

Years of operation Number of pro5rams Percent

1 year or less 14 29%

2 years 9 19%

3 years 6 13%

4 years 2 4%

5 years or iuore 17

48 100%

23


Table 2

the Absence of ASCP*Reasons Most Frequently Offered for

Reason Number of Systems

Prohibitive costs 31 45%

Limited availability of personnel 29 39%

Concern about conflict with

private facilities 25 34%

Limited or no perceived need 15 24%

*Multiple reasons were offered by some systems.

24


Tablé 3

Enrollment n After Schord Care Pragrams in

North Carolina Grade Level

Grade Number of students

entdlled

Percentage of total

ASCP enrollment

Kindergarten 702 22%

First grade 707 22%

Second grade 619 20%

Third grade 515 16%

Fourth grade 329 IO%

Fifth grade 230 7%

Sixth grade 62 2%

Grades 7 = 12 3 1%

Total8 3,167 100%

25

After School Card 25

Table_4_

Attitudes Toward ASCP

Group % Negative % Neutral % Positive

Superintendents 0 0 100

Parents of enroll d

students 0 0 100

School boards .0 6 94

Elementary supervisors 0 8 92

Principals 0 10 90

Teachers 0 22 78

Parents of students not

enrolled 0 41 59

26


Table-5

AlterSchool-Care-Program Ratings

Program Elements Exceptional Adequate Inadequate

Administration 59% 41%

Curriculum 34% 64% 2%

Equipment/supplies 36% 60% 4%

Personnel 72% 28%

Physical facilities 50% 45% 5%

Support services 41% 52% 7%

Overall program 65% 35%

27

After School Cate 27

Figure Caption

Figure 1

The Percentage of Working Women with Children Beween

6 and 17 in North Carolina and the United States

28


29

100

80

Women 60

inLaboForce 40

2

N.C. U.S.1970

30

N.C. U.

1980

document resume pub date 86 30p. - files.eric.ed.gov · document resume. ed 281 630 ps 016 487....

Documents